Judge: John C. Gastelum, Case: 20-01175201, Date: 2022-07-28 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Irogs

Ruling:  Off Calendar – no hearing will be held.  Plaintiff Christopher Stimson, Jr., a minor by and through, his Guardian Ad Litem, Nichol Smith’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories, Set One is DENIED without prejudice.

First, Plaintiff failed to provide a proof of service of his motion.  Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1013a and 1013b, documents served and filed must be accompanied by a proof of service establishing the means by which the documents were served.  (See also Cal. Rules of Court, rules 1.21, 2.251.)  “Proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court days before the time appointed for the hearing.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300, subd. (c), emphasis added.) 

Second, Plaintiff failed to submit a declaration with his moving papers authenticating the exhibits included in the motion.  (Evid. Code, §§ 1400 and 1401, subd. (a) [“Authentication of a writing is required before it may be received in evidence.”].)  It is insufficient that Plaintiff submitted the declaration with his reply papers.  (Reichardt v. Hoffman (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 754, 764, as modified on denial of reh’g (Mar. 5, 1997) [“Points raised for the first time in a reply brief will ordinarily not be considered, because such consideration would deprive the respondent of an opportunity to counter the argument.”].)

Third, Plaintiff failed to identify the interrogatory numbers to which he is moving to compel.  Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1345, “[a] motion concerning interrogatories, inspection demands, or admission requests must identify the interrogatories, demands, or requests by set and number.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1345, subd. (d).) 

The request for sanctions is DENIED.

Plaintiff to give notice.